Fps not 60fps!

[Melvin8D]

Hello there, my unreal gold is not running at 60fps like a game from, 1998 should on my pc. I've tried everything to speed it up, installed 227i patch, disabled vsync, and I seem to only get 50fps. Can anyone help me get it run faster? My Specs are Intel Core 2 Quad Core Processor (2.33ghz), a nvidia gt 210 2gb, 4gb of ram, and windows 10 if those help. I know I have a crappy pc, but I can't even run unreal?

For comparison, I can run serious sam (2001) with no frame rate issues, heck I can even run painkiller (2004) with no lag.

Edit: I am also using the opengl renderer.

[Francisè von Spitroast]

Try DirectX 9.

[(T:S:B)IceLizard]

I don't know if this would be connected with your specific issue, but in 227i (and all previous versions of Unreal), the graphics is mostly entirely rendered from the CPU rather than the GPU.

When 227J is released, it will contain a new renderer called XOpengl, that runs the game from the GPU rather than the CPU. 227J and Xopengl are still in a developmental phase, so smirftsch is still working on fixing bugs and making the performance of 227J and Xopengl better. Though so far with XOpengl, subjecting the game to a stress test scene of 4000 animated animated blades of grass (this was something we tried), Smirftsch was able to improve XOpengl's original framerate by about 4 times, and that was when XOpengl had around as good performance as normal OpenGL.

XOpengl will also support some modern features like normalmapping for modders/level designers/content creators to make use of, aswel as other 'nice things'.

One question I should also ask, is what your colour depth is set to? 16 bit will run slower than 32 bit, and as far as I remember, a fresh steam install of Unreal Gold has the colour depth set to 16bit by default.

Edit: Also, it might be good to make a thread about this on the www.oldunreal.com forums, as there are very knowledgeable guys there compared to the steam discussions here on average. It is also the home of the 227 patch.

[Francisè von Spitroast]

Wow. The new update sounds amazing. What about DirectX 9 renderer? Is that mostly CPU?

[(T:S:B)IceLizard]

Originally posted by Rubber Soul:

Wow. The new update sounds amazing. What about DirectX 9 renderer? Is that mostly CPU?

I actually don't know much about the directX9 renderer, as I rarely use D3d, but Melvin8D could always try to switch to that renderer to see if it changes anything.

The main reason quite a few people don't use d3d though is that the colour richness is not as good as OpenGL. That was the problem myself and some other people had with it anyway, though.

[Francisè von Spitroast]

Originally posted by (T:S:B)IceLizard:

Originally posted by Rubber Soul:

Wow. The new update sounds amazing. What about DirectX 9 renderer? Is that mostly CPU?

I actually don't know much about the directX9 renderer, as I rarely use D3d, but Melvin8D could always try to switch to that renderer to see if it changes anything.

The main reason quite a few people don't use d3d though is that the colour richness is not as good as OpenGL. That was the problem myself and some other people had with it anyway, though.

Aren't D3D and DirectX 9 two different things?

[Francisè von Spitroast]

I looked and yeah sort of. I think the original D3D from back in the day had the issue for sure but it's been corrected or something since then. I did a comparison to standard OpenGL and 9 and they look exactly the same, except OpenGL has lower quality textures.

[(T:S:B)IceLizard]

Hmm, it could possibly be that your anisotropy level on opengl is not set to very high, causing the degradation of texture detail on further away surfaces. I don't think that opengl should result in having less than the maximum resolution of textures.

[Francisè von Spitroast]

Originally posted by (T:S:B)IceLizard:

Hmm, it could possibly be that your anisotropy level on opengl is not set to very high, causing the degradation of texture detail on further away surfaces. I don't think that opengl should result in having less than the maximum resolution of textures.

That's likely the case then.

[Moff]

Try installing NGlide, and run the game under 3dfx glide api. It should be pretty fast, and imo it still looks better than either one of opengl\d3d versions.

[Melvin8D]

Ok then, I will get 227j when it comes out. Also, I am on 32 bit color.

[that's what she said]

Originally posted by Melvin8D:

Ok then, I will get 227j when it comes out. Also, I am on 32 bit color.

he's bulls**ting you about this new community patch. Any renderer other than 'software' is using your GPU exclusively.
It has nothing to do with patch or rendering API.

Sure, new patch is supposed to have new rendering features for opengl renderer, but it has nothing to do with current performance.

Have you tried to do a clean install of GPU drivers? It often helps.

[(T:S:B)IceLizard]

In the case of Unreal, renderers like Opengl and D3d run mostly from the CPU rather than the GPU, while only handing the rendering over to the GPU to 'polish up' some stuff.

But perhaps @that's what she said should take your argument up with www.oldunreal.com, the Unreal 1 community nexus and the home of the 227 patch (the site is run by the guy who Epic gave the sourcecode to and who works on the 227 patch) rather than spreading unhelpful information here about the 227 patch not being essential for performance and modern day systems (not really entirely sure what you mean to be honest).

[GamingWithSilvertail]

If you actually installed the 227i patch, all should look like the Unreal Tournament menu.


Thus go to Preferences - Video, Change video devices. I bet you didnt do this. 227 includes the latest opengl renderer.

Also the 227 patch actually is made so that people with modern machines can play the game fluiently.

With that PC, I would actually install an older windows too.

This could also be a frame limit problem in the ini file.

[GamingWithSilvertail]

Originally posted by (T:S:B)IceLizard:

Hmm, it could possibly be that your anisotropy level on opengl is not set to very high, causing the degradation of texture detail on further away surfaces. I don't think that opengl should result in having less than the maximum resolution of textures.

You dojnt really need that to make Unreal Engine games look decent.

[Francisè von Spitroast]

It's not really his fault for not having changed renderers. I don't know any other game besides original Unreal engine games where that's necessary. And yeah 4GB RAM is too low for Win10 if it works on other games there's no need to change for one.

Btw, if you're not hitting 60fps on a 210 at 1080p that's because the card's useless. I had one and I couldn't.